On 11/9/22 09:28, John Garry wrote:
On 09/11/2022 07:47, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
If a host template doesn't implement the .eh_abort_handler()
there is no point in queueing the abort workqueue function;
all it does is invoking SCSI EH anyway.
So return 'FAILED' from scsi_abort_command() if the .eh_abort_handler()
is not implemented and save us from having to wait for the
abort workqueue function to complete.
Do we ever use shost->tmf_work_q in this case? Doesn't seem much point
in allocating it, apart from keeping the code simpler
Actually, no. Guess we can skip allocating it.
Cc: Niklas Cassel <Niklas.Cassel@xxxxxxx>
Cc: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: John Garry <john.garry@xxxxxxxxxx>
That's someone else :)
Oh. Sorry, John :-)
Signed-off-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@xxxxxxx>
---
drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c | 5 +++++
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
index be2a70c5ac6d..e9f9c8f52c59 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
@@ -242,6 +242,11 @@ scsi_abort_command(struct scsi_cmnd *scmd)
return FAILED;
}
+ if (!shost->hostt->eh_abort_handler) {
nit: no need for {}, but maybe better put comment above the check if
removing it. However maybe it's also a bit obvious comment.
Yeah, will do.
+ /* No abort handler, fail command directly */
+ return FAILED;
+ }
+
spin_lock_irqsave(shost->host_lock, flags);
if (shost->eh_deadline != -1 && !shost->last_reset)
shost->last_reset = jiffies;
Cheers,
Hannes
--
Dr. Hannes Reinecke Kernel Storage Architect
hare@xxxxxxx +49 911 74053 688
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg), GF: Felix Imendörffer
